Yeah that's usually the reason behind these sorts of critiques, but I wanted to give a thorough response because I think that this topic deserves it. The issue of unions in China is not that simple, and there are legitimate things you could point out that need improvement in China's labor system.

I have read some criticisms from Chinese people themselves about things that their unions could do better and ways that labor laws could stand to be improved, and those should not be discounted.

But the fact that unions are not independent is not one of those things that need fixing, quite the opposite, it is a good thing, there is solid Marxist-Leninist theory to support this. And those problems that do currently exist would remain regardless or potentially even worsen if they were independent

I mean look at the state of unions in western countries. For the most part they are either compromised and led by collaborationists who would rather work with the capitalists than against them, or they are largely neutered in what they can even legally do. So it's not like the western system is better than China's, it's clearly not.

Though potentially a useful tool for revolutionaries, trade unions by themselves are not guaranteed to be revolutionary in the absence of a real labor movement and vanguard party, and they can even be reactionary at times.

I think this needs to be understood. Too many western communists are still stuck in this mentality that puts unions on a pedestal.

All that sounds great in theory, but in practice we have seen historically where it ends. Do you believe Poland is better off now for having had their socialism destroyed, in large part by the subversive actions of the Solidarność union? How do you concretely propose to avoid that scenario from re-occurring?

It is not a far step from independent unions to demanding that each enterprise should be independent of state interference, and then you just end up with Perestroika.

The only logical end result of the creation of dual power structures separate from and competing with the state is the undermining and eventual destruction of that state. The reasons why communists strive to build such dual power structures in capitalist societies are precisely the reasons why these should not exist in socialist societies.

The thing is that both in Soviet Democracy and in China's Whole-Process People's Democracy there are mechanisms for the people to not only elect but also to actively participate in the political life of the country, from the local all the way to the national level, and to hold government accountable.

Why circumvent those democratic processes? What gives you the right to elevate the interests of certain small groups of workers above those of the whole working class?

Frankly this whole line of criticism is indicative to me of a liberal and individualist mentality more concerned with "individual freedom" than with the greater material well-being of the whole society. It reeks of anarchism/ultra-leftism.

I won't get into the Trotsky debate here but suffice it to say that his position ended up being rejected by the majority of the Bolsheviks. My point is that there is no need to dig up and rehash this particular struggle, it has already been settled. Better to focus on concrete improvements based in real material criticism of the problems of unions in China.